45-70 with 4350 powder

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Avanger,

Little question that there are better powders for the 45/70 then 4350. I use H335 in mine behind a 465gr Wide Flat Nose cast. AWESOME.

But since you are specifying 4350, you might look up information for the Accurate Arms 4350, they list loads with their powder from 378gr up through 500gr.

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Avenger442]

Got to the range yesterday with the SW4350 powder and the 45-70 Marlin Cowboy with 26" barrel. I shot 40 rounds with four different loads 49gr-52gr. Bullets averaged 405 gr and were out of a Lee 90491 hollow point mold. They were sized 459. Used Hornady cases with CCI primers. Temperature was about 90F with no wind to speak of. Target was at 100 yards.

Because I already had 20 cases primed with CCI 200 primers I used them with the first twenty loads. The rest were CCI magnum primers.

49 grains of powder with CCI 200 standard primer grouped the best at a tad over 2 1/2". I was surprised at this since research and what had been said on this thread seemed to indicate that the 52 grains and CCI 250 primers might group better. But they were terrible. So bad I didn't even measure. I've got to look at the barrel closer to make sure I didn't have any fouling that might have caused this. But preliminary look didn't indicate that that was a problem. There was some unburned powder with the standard primer and 49-50 gr. loads. Something the magnum primer cleared up in the 51 gr. and 52 gr. loads. Speeds with the 49 gr. and standard primer were 1200+ fps. With the 52 gr. and magnum primer they were 1400+. I was getting low SD with the 49 and 50 gr. loads. One was an 8.5. Bullet was still traveling 1100 fps at 100 yards with the 49 gr. load. 405 grain bullet at 1100 fps should produce pretty good terminal ballistics. I'll let you guys get out the calculators

I believe I'm going back to the range next time with half magnum primers and half standard with the 49 gr. load and see if it is really the best. In my .308 I've had measurable difference with half grain changes in the H4895 powder. I'm wondering if that might be true here too. So I might also go .5 grains either side of the 49.



Obviously by this photo I've got some scope adjusting to do.

[Crusty Deary Ol'Coot]

Avenger,

THANKS for posting your results!

The results weren't bad although another powder may produce better groups. Only one way to find out and that is too test them.

As per test loads, with rifles when I am getting anywhere close to what I expect to be optimum for a given powder, 1/2gr. steps are the norm and can easily make the difference between a keeper and a reject.

I realize the following is NOT fired in a 45/70, but it is given only to illustrate the point.

I was doing my first set of test loads in a new 30/06 RUGER American and after looking at "the books" chose to test RL22 with a 165gr Hornady Interlock in the first go around. I tested the following loads, 58gr, 59gr, 60gr, 60.5gr, 61gr, 61.5gr and last 62gr.

Without giving all the results, 60.5gr put 3 test rounds into 1 11/16", 61gr went 1 1/16", 61.5gr went 11/16" and 62gr went 3 into 1 1/2"

Had I increased the test charges by a full grain in each case, I would have complexly missed the excellent results these first tests gave at the 61.5gr level.

I later verified the results of that 61.5gr load and it remained consistently accurate. Not sure just how well this rifle might shoot with another powder, as this first test series gave what I was looking for, an accurate and consistent load for the deer and elk and bear found in our area.

So, the point is, 1/2 gr. may well be the difference between an excellent and just a so so result.

It is not unusual to see groups decrease in size as pressures rise and once past optimum for that rifle/component combination begin to increase just as shown in the example above. Each firearm is a rule unto itself, and what is good/safe in one rifle may be excessive or well below optimum in another rifle of the same make and caliber. Only testing will answer that question.

My 45/70 gives results with my H335 load and 465gr Wide Flat Nose Cast of about 2 - 2 1/2". I'd LIKE groups of smaller size, but where the RUGER American "06" might be called on to take a critter at 400yds, the 45/70 is for my purposes a sub 200yd. hunting rifle.. It has taken a big cow elk at 161yds.

Although I have tested other powders seeking a decrease in group size I have yet to find "that load", but the 45/70 in combination with this load has accounted for a pile of deer and 3 elk to date. At reasonable 45/70 ranges and with good shot placement, it gets it done!

Crusty Deary Ol'Coot

[Avenger442]

Component changes seem to always lead me back to load development. This change in powder I knew would lead me there. But I had one recently that surprised me. Instead of other types of lubes I started using HI Tek coating when I started casting about five years ago. I have several others on hand but don't use them for one reason or another. I had been told by the manufacturer through a thread on this blog that a single coat would do to keep lead out of my barrel. Most of us that use it in rifles do three coats on the bullets. The handgun guys mostly just use two. Anyway, in order to test the idea of one coat doing the job of three I decided to take some single coated bullets to the range. It did a good job of keeping the lead out of the barrel of the .308. Unfortunately the load that was working with three coats now was not the typical 1 1/2" group. Everything was the same except the number of coats? So if I want to use one coat I'm back to testing again. I believe I'll stick with the three coats since that was working before.

[osteodoc08]

Give Varget, benchmark, or 8208 a try. I’ve had very good success with accuracy with them and all my marlins.

[Maineboy]

Do you have anything heavier than the Lee? How heavy a crimp are you using? The Lyman 457406 I used with 5010 weighed almost 500 grains and I used magnum primers, Federal I believe, with a heavy crimp. This was probably 18-20 years ago and my notes are not very complete.
At the time I did this, there were more than a few posters on the old board who were purchasing very slow surplus powders, stuffing cartridge cases with them, and shooting cast and jacketed with varying degrees of success. The heavy ball powders seemed to work the best. I still have about 2 pounds left from an 8 pound jug of 5010 that I will probably never use. It's just too dirty.

[Avenger442]

I do have a Lee mold 459-500-3R that cast 500+ gr. bullets. Unfortunately I didn't do enough homework before I bought it. The bullet is just too long for the Marlin's chamber. My crimp has been light. Might go to a heavier crimp to see what that will do. I'm still looking at primers. And when I go back to the range I'll be using both standard and magnum to see what I can wring out.

Want to offer the following testing on primers done by Bill Davis and published in the American Rifleman in May 1984. All done with all other components as identical as possible. It was in a .308. All double checked.

Primer----------------Speed---------------Pressure

Winchester 120-----------------2626--------------------------52,500
Federal 210M-------------------2622---------------------------51,000
Remington 9-1/2---------------2571---------------------------45,500
CCI 200-------------------------2581---------------------------45,500
CCI 250-------------------------2579---------------------------46,100

I started using CCI primers when I first started loading because I was loading semi auto in ARs. Now some of you guys that have been loading a long time probably already knew this. But, I always assumed that when you switched to magnum primers you increased pressure and speed. But here increased pressure in the CCI doesn't translate to increased speed. The magnum was slower in the CCI. And the overall speed from fastest to slowest is just 45 fps. I would have though that the speed difference would have been greater. I sometimes see that much difference in readings with same loads while testing.

I don't want to get off on a mold discussion and hijack the thread but I will offer this personal opinion (and you know how opinions are; "like mouths, everybody has one"). I own and have cast with several Lyman, RCBS, NOE...... steel, brass and aluminum molds. And yes they make some beautiful bullets. But I keep coming back to Lee molds. Most of the others are just too heavy for me to want to use them for very long. I am aware of the shortcomings of the Lee aluminum molds. But the mold that cast bullets for my .308 is a Lee and they are as accurate, the end game for me, as any other I have used. Best group, so far, was four in less than 3/4" with a flyer that made it a 1" group at 100 yards.

I started this thread knowing the tendency would be, for some, to help me get away from this powder. And I appreciate all of the suggestions. It will give me something I might want to look into later. But my aim was to find some way to use the powder in the 45-70. I thought at the beginning that it might not be the optimum powder. However, some here seem to believe that the 4350 burn rate gives good enough accuracy to get 3/4" groups at 100 yards out of a 45-70. As I said before, that would absolute delight me. I have it and I'm going to use it somewhere. And, right now, the 45-70 looks like the only choice for me.

[JCherry]

Avenger442,

Just FYI to this thread. I have a 45-70 Lee Handloader (1978) with the load chart which lists 42.2 grains of IMR 4350 for 450 to 500 grain bullets using the 3.1cc powder measure scoop.

It also lists the same load with the same powder measure for IMR4831.

I have never used these loads.

Have Fun,

JCherry

[Yooper003]

If you have a friend loading for 6.5 creedmore, I bet they would love to swap for your 4350. Everything I read says 4350 is hard to get as it is very popular in 6.5

[Maineboy]

Avenger442, my experiment with 5010 in my 45-70 Marlin lasted for a brief time. Although it was successful in that the end result was an accurate load and with less recoil than most of the loads I was shooting in the rifle at the time, I deemed it a non success due to the huge amount of unburned powder that got all through the action. Those 5010 kernels are big! 4350 and 5010, while both slow powders, are a long way apart in burn speed so what worked for me may not work in your quest, I'm just relaying my experience. FWIW, I think your project is a good one and worth your time and effort and if you make it work, I may give it a try. I will stay tuned.

[Avenger442]

Was at the range again with the 4350 powder. Looks like 49 gr. with the CCI 200 primers is still the load. I'm going to try some of the ideas offered tighter crimp, +/- .5 gr powder, etc... to see if it will improve the grouping later. 2" at 100 yards is probably a good group for this load, gun and scope and certainly an OK hunting load.

I did have an interesting thing happen. While I was putting the primers into the Hornady press some got loose and I didn't find them all. Well I did find them just not on my loading bench. While I was ejecting a round at the range something round and burnt dropped out on the concrete. That's right two of the primers ended up in the 45-70 cases. I wondered why the speed was greater. I've never had that happen before.

[Chill Wills]

Back in post #26

IMR-4350 and 4831 produce knock out great accuracy in my 1886 45-70 with the Lyman 457-193.

49 gr of 4350 or 51.5 grs of 4831. These two powders are head and shoulders better than any other smokeless powder I have used and that includes IMR-3031. If I had not shot the 200 yard groups on paper repeatedly, I would not have believed it either. Give it a try.

Texas by God and I both have old old copies of the loading manual. It was a gun store counter handout about 1980 or so. Two things you should know. It states to reduces by 10% the powder charge and work up. That goes without saying, and makes sense. And, I found that using large rifle magnum primers makes a huge difference in accuracy. In my case I used Winchester Magnum primers in Starline cases.

There is next to no unburnt powder in the barrel with either load, and in fact much less than the gold standard SR-4759 loads I used to shoot by the untold thousands.

I have to comment on a few of the naysayers above that clearly never tried it and proclaimed IMR-4350 unfit, ...Well. You get the idea.
-Chill

Give the magnum primers a go. It made the difference.
-Chill

[Avenger442]

I was in one of the gun stores that I frequent to buy hand loading and other supplies yesterday. They have a table that is all discount items that I looked through. There were two older loading data manuals from the 1980s. Brand new books. Don't know where they came from but for $5 each I wasn't going to pass them up. There were multiple loads for several cartridges that I load listed for IMR 4350. Some for the 308 Winchester and 303 Enfield were listed and I load both. If someone wants a copy of the loads just ask and I will post them. But it looks like I have found the way to use up that powder. Maybe when 4350 became not as readily available they just stopped listing the loads.